Summary: The
President of the Daniel Pearl Foundation, which promotes
cross-cultural understanding between the West and the Islamic
world, has painted a bleak picture of how Israel is rejected
in the Muslim world, not just by Islamic fanatics, but by
“progressive-minded” journalists, intellectuals
and leaders. The observations of Judea Pearl were published
in June 2005 and we highlight them in Beyond Images Briefing
145.

Our view is that Pearl pinpoints the root cause of Israel’s
conflict with the Muslim world and the Palestinians: the
continued rejection of Israel’s legitimacy as a
nation-state. As long as its legitimacy is not recognised,
all peace agreements which Israel enters into will be
short-lived, all negotiations will be flawed, and all
steps which Israel takes to meet Palestinian territorial
or other requirements are liable to expose Israel to danger,
rather than building a basis for secure peace.

The Muslim world does not acknowledge Israel as a legitimate
nation-state

Judea Pearl: “In 2005, I still cannot name a
single Muslim leader (or a journalist or an intellectual) who
has publicly acknowledged the Israel-Palestinian conflict as
a dispute between two legitimate national movements…”

These are not the words of a right-wing Israeli from the “we
can never make peace with the Arabs” worldview, but of
Judea Pearl, father of the late American journalist Daniel Pearl,
who was murdered in Pakistan by terrorists in 2002. Judea Pearl
leads the foundation named after his son which was set up specifically
to promote cross-cultural understanding between the West and
the Muslim world.

Through his involvement in international dialogue conferences,
Judea Pearl has been exposed to dialogue with Muslims across
the political and ideological spectrum. So his comment above
carries considerable authority. And its message is a bleak one.

Here are other key observations made by Pearl in his article
in the Jerusalem Post (17 June 2005):-

A ‘liberal-minded’ Egyptian scholar says
that the Jews should build a version of the Vatican, instead
of a Jewish state

Pearl discussed the prevailing mood about Israel at a conference
in Doha on US-Islamic relations in early 2005 with an Egyptian
scholar “renowned for his liberalism in the Arab context.”
The scholar commented:-

“The Jews should build themselves a Vatican, a spiritual
centre somewhere near Jerusalem. But there is no place for a
Jewish state in Palestine, not even a national-Jewish state.
The Jews were driven out 2000 years ago, and that should be
final, similar to the explusion of the Moors from Spain 500
years ago….”

Aide to Muhammed Dahlan: Palestinians don’t believe
in two states

Pearl had an informal conversation at the same meeting in Doha
with an aide to the Palestinians’ Civil Affairs Minister
Muhammed Dahlan. The aide said:

“We Palestinians do not believe in a two-state solution,
for we can’t agree to the notion of a “Jewish”
state. Judaism is a religion and religions should not have states…..
Palestine is too small for two states….”

East-West conference in Malaysia – “Israel
must be dismantled….”

Pearl also reports that the overwhelming majority of participants
at another recent East-West conference, this time in Putrajaya,
Malaysia, stated that Israel was “founded on pillars of
injustice, and must be dismantled….”

Pearl: what comes first, dialogue, or the foundation
for dialogue?

Having highlighted this intellectual rejectionism of Israel,
Pearl questions the current approach to dialogue. Dialogue initiatives
and bridge-building between the West and the Muslim world are
all well and good, but efforts should first be made to hammer
out some basic common goals and educational campaigns, rather
than glossing over fundamental disagreement.

Our Comments

Pearl’s article provides an insight into the prevailing
mindset in the Muslim world. It is a reminder that the core
of the conflict between Israel and its neighbours is not Israel’s
occupation of territory, but the very legitimacy of Israel as
a nation-state.

As long as Israel’s legitimacy is not recognised, all
peace agreements which Israel enters into will be short-lived,
all negotiations will be flawed, and all steps which Israel
takes to meet Palestinian territorial or other requirements
are liable to expose Israel to danger, rather than building
the basis for secure peace.